So, over in Rogers' question post
on his blog for "The Morning After Job" someone commented with:
Okay, in the season 2 commentary for The Order 23 Job (geek much?), y'all said that even though the theories run that Eliot being abused as a child is what compels him to act on behalf of children, that that wasn't the case.
The question now is, did y'all change your minds on that point? Because every time a child is involved, or he thinks one might be, things get very touchy very quickly. There has to be a reason, and you have to give it to us, even if it's not the reason we think. Something's going on there, because even though I really think Eliot has a soft heart despite what he does, most guys like him aren't overly concerned about kids unless something is underlying."And this has always intrigued me, too. Especially their insistence that Eliot was not a victim of child abuse. For awhile, I thought perhaps it was something like a friend of his was when he was younger. But something just occurred to me as another possibility.
If we add into this, Eliot's reference to his nephew in "The Miracle Job" in season 1, this alludes (to me) that he is still in quite close contact with his brother/sister (I prefer brother myself) to know what it is his nephew would like in terms of fun. So, what if, Eliot had a younger sibling (I'm going with the assumption that the nephew's parent is an older sibling making Eliot the middle child), who was left in his care for some reason, some tragic accident happened and the younger child died? I think this would definitely instill the "must protect child" vibe we get from him, but also be a little more interesting than a friend was a victim of abuse. It makes it much more personal and more to Eliot MUST protect whoever he can, cos he didn't back then.
Of course, I may need to rewatch "The Future Job" and his reaction to Parker's confession about her brother.
Anyway, that just happens to be how I feel about it. What do you think? ;-)